Would this work?

If the gory photos on cigarette packs and the threat of a hideous death weren’t enough, now an academic has come up with a grim countdown-to-death for smokers.

Smokers will literally be able to see the minutes of their life expectancy drop away with each smoke, if Massey University College of Health head Professor Paul McDonald’s idea gains traction.

He is proposing an idea in which each cigarette would be marked with six rings and a message saying each ring smoked past would take a minute off life expectancy.

If adopted, New Zealand would be the first in the world to print warnings directly on to cigarettes.

The idea is still in its infancy but a preliminary survey of 10 smokers by Prof McDonald showed it would have a “profound” effect.

I’d be wary of any study with just 10 people in it.

As with plain packaging, I’d trial ideas like this in a geographic region so one can establish whether smoking rates there change more than the rest of the country.

The Dominion Post asked four smokers if Professor Paul McDonald’s idea would encourage them to quit.

– Luke Eling, 23, a chef from Brooklyn: It wouldn’t help.

It’s killing you but you are going to die anyway, so bugger it.

I would see if I can smoke it faster than six minutes.

– Robbie King, 33, a body piercer from central Wellington: If it was actually true and you could gauge it like that, it may help. Yes, smoking can be bad for you but my grandfather lived till 97, smoking five times as much as me.

– Mark Speedy, 35, a milkman from Churton Park: It wouldn’t stop me. What if you have a heart attack? Is it a minute off that? Obviously not.

beautox

What the hell is the obsession with getting other people to stop smoking? Don’t these folks have their own businesses that need minding?

But at a deeper level, we should be encouraging smokers. We should be making high-tar, filterless ciggies cheaper, to encourage a faster demise. Why? Because smokers are our best chance of getting out of the sticky pensions problem. If enough of them check out early then that will make the pension affordable for the country. Also the tax that smokers pay far exceeds the health costs of their relatively fast ends. Bring back tobacco advertising I say..

Judith

Ever watched the movie “In Time”? – having a clock counting down showing just how much time you are consuming, and how long you have to live, can be very effective. Sometimes we need to have explicit messages to motivate us.

What a load of bollocks – when you’ve been around a while you will have encountered people who do all the things that the health nazis say are bad who live well into their nineties despite this as well as the health fanatics who suddenly drop dead in their forties or occasionally even younger.

It is a grim reality something is going to nail you one way or another – these people don’t have your welfare at heart, they are just control freaks

Judith

Andrei (2,074) Says:
June 1st, 2013 at 11:58 am

———————————–

You are right, I don’t have their welfare at heart – I have mine and I’m sick of paying taxes for the health costs involved providing long term smokers with treatment. If you want to pay your own health costs in private hospitals – feel free to smoke – but the tax you pay on tobacco does not cover that. As long as smokers take up much needed beds, keep medical professionals busy when they could be dealing with other non-self inflicted health issues – the yes, we have a right to have a say. (Same goes for people who are obese etc, and those who get sick through irresponsibility)

No problem with anyone doing whatever they like, as long as it has no impact on other people. But when it effects me – I’ll bitch about it!

Judith

Redbaiter (3,166) Says:
June 1st, 2013 at 12:25 pm
—————————

NO, in other words, you just flew in and commented without reading my post properly. You thought I was talking about public medical attention, but I was quite specific and mentioned ‘private’ which as you know, is NOT funded by the government, and therefore not funded by tobacco tax.

Judith, the cost to public health is more than offset by surcharges on tobacco. If smokers paid no additional tax, then yes, you would be paying for their healthcare bills and would be entitled to a say in their behaviour costing you. But that argument only lasts as long as tobacco surcharges don’t cover that extra cost.

At this point, if everyone stopped smoking, there would be a sudden drop in tax revenue to pay for those hospital beds you’re worried about.

CharlieBrown

Judith – Dieing of any illness isn’t cheap. Alot of recent statistics have shown that the money the government makes from smoking is more than what they cost. You just want to dictate your values into other peoples lives. And not every smoker dies from smoking. Farout – eating too much kills more people. Typical socialist bullshit trying to lump everyone into the same bracket.

Once the anti-smoking nazis have had their way, alcohol and fast food will be next.

You are right, I don’t have their welfare at heart – I have mine and I’m sick of paying taxes for the health costs involved providing long term smokers with treatment.

That’s fair enough, but the problem with that argument is that every smoker who dies earlier than they should is one more person that the government no longer has to pay National Superannuation to. The costs of Super far outweigh any health costs from smoking. If the government were viewing this issue purely according to their balance sheet, they would be encouraging as many people to smoke as possible!

I don’t smoke and I don’t like smoking, or smokers, but I do treat them as adults who can make their own decisions in life. I am disgusted that so many others, especially government bureaucrats, are not prepared to extend them the same courtesy.

Would this work? Well, it could theoretically work for very stupid people, but that’s a small minority of the population.

The thing is, even if people aren’t familiar enough with statistics to know why a population-level mean is no indicator of their individual situation, most instinctively know it. Witness the bloke who says

What if you have a heart attack? Is it a minute off that? Obviously not.

Likewise, the one who says my grandfather lived till 97, smoking five times as much as me.

If you’re providing a health warning that most people will recognise as obviously wrong, most people are unlikely to heed the warning.

Yes, but everybody dies of something eventually, and they eventually will need some sort of medical care for whatever kills them. It’s possible smoking related illnesses cost more than dementia or natural bodily deterioration, but not significantly more such that it would offset the savings to NZ Super they make by dying early. And that’s before you even factor in the tax from the cigarettes.

Warren Murray

I think its a novel idea. Many committed smokers won’t be influenced by it, but fail to see how this is an assault on liberty, like others have said.

I feel sorry for smokers who have become slaves to their addiction, but my pity quickly becomes anger when I’m forced to breath their second hand smoke or share a confined space (lift, train, bus, etc) with someone who even when they arent smoking reeks of cigarettes.

Some posts on this subject are depressing, many smokers are not only doomed to die prematurely, but also endure considerable suffering. Tobacco companies are merchants of death and should be put put of business.

Fisiani

CharlieBrown

BlairM – I wouldn’t be surprised if rotting away with dementia for years cost more than someone dieing of lung cancer.

Warren – Are you one of those nazis that supported the ban smoking in bars and other work places? In this day and age I highly doubt there is any space in NZ where you are forced to breathe in second hand smoke. And even when smoking was allowed in the bars, you still weren’t forced to inhale it ever – you always had the choice to not go to a place that allowed smoking. Tobacco companies are fulling a demand that people FREELY choose to take up, you are someone that wants to take away peoples individual liberty.

All_on_Red

Redbaiter 1
Judith 0
Well done Reddy, you’ve scared her off.
A simple google search finds:
“May 30, 2012—A treasury report has admitted that smoking saves the New Zealand government money because smokers die earlier and pay more in tobacco tax than their health problems cost, according to a story in the Otago Daily Times.
taxes are estimated to increase the government’s tax take from tobacco from $1.3 billion to around $1.7 billion by 2016.
A University of Otago study in 2007 estimated that the direct cost of smoking to the ministry of health was $300 million to $350 million.”